search results matching tag: Turk

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (902)     Sift Talk (1)     Blogs (13)     Comments (342)   

Debunking the Palestine Lie

newtboy says...

Entirely one sided misleading propaganda.

It completely ignores and glosses over the millions of armed Jewish invaders that took over what’s now the ever expanding Israel, outnumbering the less well armed and unsupported Palestinians, quickly creating an apartheid state with inhuman treatment of the now minority native population displaced by European Jews that had no intention of sharing the land they had stolen from the native inhabitants with England’s and America’s blessing, nor of keeping to the borders they agreed to.

So much history was intentionally deleted or completely misrepresented here it’s more misinformation than informative.
The Palestinian people were subjugated by the Turks, then the British, and now by the genocidal Zionists.

The argument here is like if you imagine America has essentially no military at all having just won independence from Britain in 1948, and the French demanded 1/2 of Louisiana as it was originally a French nation and they suffered greatly in the war, including of course New Orleans, and Canada offered them 25% which they agree to, America said “hell no, why should we hand over our land to foreign invaders?”, and now America is blamed for France’s brutal invasion and unending dehumanization of and inhuman war crimes against and brutal subjugation and imprisonment of the people of the entire Louisiana territory that France now claims, with sights on more expansion.

*lies

Dave Smith Breaks Down the Reasons Russia Invaded Ukraine

Why Do Americans Smile So Much?

messenger says...

I lived in Turkey for four years, and after a while I noticed that Turks didn't respond well to my smiling. They didn't understand it as a friendly signal, and it actually caused friction. I never asked about it, but I somehow caught on that they thought I was stupid. I thought about it, and it made perfect sense to me that it was stupid to smile at things that shouldn't make you happy.

So I stopped smiling in stores and restaurants, with coworkers, and even with Turkish friends. My interactions with people improved noticeably.

After four years, I moved back to Canada, where I continued not smiling for no reason. I've never been able to get back into the habit. I just feel stupid and unnatural smiling for no reason. People smile at me just because they see me, and they smile politely. I can't smile back. I just raise my eyebrows.

People now tell me constantly that I'm too sad, that I should smile more that I'm not happy. Now, there's some truth to that -- I do suffer from depression -- but that predates living in Turkey and it's only since then that anyone's accused me of being sad, or even noticed that I don't smile as much as I should. I've had to train my friends out of referring to me as grumpy.

My job is teaching English as a Second Language to students from all over the world. My Western students -- particularly the Latinos -- tell me daily (literally) that I don't smile enough. My East Asian and Eastern European students have never said a word in that direction. I just realized the divide now after watching this video.


Dems Double Down On Taking Billionaire Money

enoch says...

i really do not understand you bob.
i get that you are republican,and lean towards the philosophy of the tea party.

i have absolutely no issue with that,but didn't you admonish my post which was promoting the "justice democrats" as not being a grass roots anti-corporate establishment democrats,but rather a tool for outlets like the young turks? whose FIRST order to address.the FIRST thing they are going after is:money in politics.which is exactly what kyle is talking about.

kyle is also talking about giving the boot to not only all the corporate donors,but the very politicians that have LOST,consistently,because they are more interested in dialing for donors than doing their job.pelosi did not retain her position due to her political acumen and ability to pass progressive legislature,but because that woman is a money funding machine.

kyle even mentions the justice democrats!!!!
as a viable option to combat the corruption in the democratic party due to the corrosive influence of corporate money in politics.

you literally just posted a video by secular talk,which is a founding member of justice democrats!

so which one is it bob?

do you respect and admire a small group of democrats who are part of independent media and are creating a group to combat the corporate,establishment democrats? a group who is already
growing in size,and have already got some politicians on the ballot?

or are you sticking to your position you took on my justice democrat video,which was dismissive and critical?

please help me understand bob,because as of right now you are playing two positions that are philosophically inconsistent.

*promote bob's support of the democrats new caucus "the justice democrats",which i am fairy sure is the seventh sign of the apocalypse.

there is a new party in town called the justice democrats

bobknight33 says...

Lets see ....grass roots movement or TYT making you believe it is a grass roots movement.

We have a " fan" who sent in this video and I love it... It is his own organization.


The Justice Democrats are a political action committee[1] founded on January 23, 2017, by Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks,

Kyle Kulinski of Secular Talk, and

former leadership from the 2016 Bernie Sanders presidential campaign.

Its stated goal of reforming the Democratic Party by running "a unified campaign to replace every corporate-backed member of Congress and rebuild the [Democratic] party from scratch" starting in the 2018 Congressional midterm elections.[2][3]

The Justice Democrats have been described as attempting to create a left-wing populist movement analogous to the right-wing Tea Party movement.[4]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Democrats

CNN caught reporting fake news on russian hack

enoch says...

jimmy dore is from the young turks.

while you may disagree with his delivery,you cannot deny that historically the intelligence community has been used as a battering ram to perpetrate some fucked up,and sometimes,illegal shit.

multiple intelligence agencies also swore that saddam hussein had WMD's and was collaborating with al qeada.

multiple intelligence agencies swore that the conflict in vietnam needed to be expanded,and use sect of defense robert mcnamara to sell it to president johnson.

mcnamara later recanted and displayed deep regret for the lies he sold not only the president,but the american people.colin powell ended up doing the very same thing,for the EXACT same reasons.

in my opinion,CNN has slowly become a propaganda arm for the state.so it is NO surprise that they reference these "multiple intelligence sources" as a means to increase tensions between US and russia.

and while i am positive that russia,along with the US and pretty much every advanced nation on this planet engages in cyber spying,until i see actual PROOF that putin directed russian intelligence to actively hack our elections in order to put trump in power...i am going to remain skeptical.

because i have seen "multiple intelligence sources' as an excuse to engage in some pretty despicable activities by my government.

i live by a very simple axiom:
governments lie.

RT -- Chris Hedges on Media, Russia and Intelligence

enoch says...

@bcglorf
i have no issue with disagreement.
i have read many of hedges books,and to see his evolution over the years really should not surprise anyone.

we all have an evolution of sorts when we continue to investigate,and challenge our own preconceptions.the intelligent man or woman,will accept this new information,and change their conclusions accordingly.the hyper-partisan and/or rigid fundamentalist,will dismiss this new information because it conflicts with their dearly held preconceptions.

some people struggle with a changing landscape,and prefer to reside in their own comfort zones.

i like hedges because he challenges and criticizes power,but he also tends to speak in apocalyptic verbiage.

i also respect hedges because he does back up his opinions with actual sources.now we can disagree with his conclusions,but how he came to those conclusions,he is quite clear.

on a side note:i cannot watch or read hedges for extended periods due to the fact that what he is pointing out is so damn depressing.

but he is incredibly consistent in regards to criticizing power.

which,in my opinion,is so very vital in these times,because we see the majority of corporate media revealing a reverence and fealty to corporate power.

chris hedges has earned my respect.
but i do not demand that everyone read or listen to him.

and speaking only for myself,i refuse to dismiss a viewpoint simply because it may be on a venue of questionable intent.
i read the american conservative,though this is a website funded by pat buchanon.i do so because the american conservative produces some damn fine content,with journalists who source their material.

i may disagree with their conclusions,but i cannot ignore the quality of their work.

this is the same reason why i no longer do work for crooks and liars and the young turks and good god..SLATE.does this mean that everything they produce is utter shit?

no..of course not,but they all have taken a book out of the FOX model, and became hyper-partisan,faux outrage machines.

now let us take this video,which so happens to be on RT.
what is it that hedges is saying that is WRONG? or false? or a lie?

i have no issue with disagreement,nor skepticism,but is anything he is saying really that controversial?
what is he saying that should be dismissed?
should his words simply be dismissed due to him being on RT?

if we refuse to accept the words,or conclusions from any public personality,simply because of the media that they happen to be on,then..in my opinion..we relegate ourselves to a handful of outlets,and it diminishes the conversation.

is it any wonder or surprise that those academics that are critical of power are NEVER seen on corporate media?
that those brave and courageous journalists and academics are forced to the fringes in order to get their messages out.

we can disagree with their messages and conclusions,but for us to even have the OPTION to disagree.they need a media outlet in order to even put the word out.

do you see what i am saying?

i am probably wording this wrong,and producing more confusion than clarity,but when the corporate media controls who and what gets to be discussed,debated and argued.then THEY are the ones who set the agenda.they are the ones who set the lines of discussion and the parameters of that discussion.

and people like hedges have not been invited to the table for decades.

it appears that any journalist,or academic that is critical of power are relegated to the fringes.

you will never see noam chomsky on FOX,or MSNBC,or CNN.

but you will see them on independent media.
such as democracy now,or the real news and yes...venues like RT and aljazeera english.

i probably totally messed my point up,but it is in there somewhere.
i am just gonna stop right here,because now i am just rambling.

Things aren't always as they seem

Jinx says...

Dunno, some relatives really hate each other

I'd love to see my DNA ancestry so I can say nigger (sorry sorry sorry) without white guilt because it says I'm 0.3% Sub-Saharan African.

No rly tho, I'm English as far back as anybody has looked so I'm actually a bit worried that it would turn out that the DNA indicates that my family have been sitting on this island FOREVER. I want an excuse to travel the world to find my "roots", fuck Holidays in the UK, it had best tell me I'm a Slav with bits of African and, err, Turkish! Yeah, I want to see Istanbul. Give me a bit of Turk too please.

newtboy said:

*quality idea to make comparative DNA compulsory. It would certainly screw with people that advocate separation by race. It's much harder to dehumanize people when you realize you are likely related.
*doublepromote

RedSky (Member Profile)

RedSky (Member Profile)

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Protest the Dakota Access Pipeline

Most Lives Matter | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee

Babymech says...

I'm sorry for the derail, I just love the absolute certainty of that question - I hope the sincerely religious feel the same way about god's existence.

Additionally, I am starting to worry that the problem is not that people refuse to consider that they might be wrong... it's that they don't care if they're wrong or not. It's literally an irrelevant thing to worry about. If the rest of us want to play that game where we match actual facts to actual words, that's fine - the truth of what they say is in the message, not whether or not the facts happen to match up. Not only are they immune to facts, but they really feel that facts are a second-rate measurement of truth.

I saw a fascinating video* on this once - maybe here - that discussed the ancient (Biblical) understanding of truth, vs the modern understanding of truth. If you have a great story with a strong lesson, the modern measure of truth is whether or not the events described in the story match any actual events, and the Biblical measure of the truth of the story is whether it teaches a strong lesson or not. Maybe it's my ivory tower elitism but that seems to be exactly what goes on in the GOP now - if a 'war on cops,' for example, is a powerful story, it's more true than if the statistics show that officers are safer now.

*It was probably this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL6E4eMX-4k (Reza Aslan on the Young Turks)

ChaosEngine said:

@SDGundamX, that's my whole point. He refused to even consider the possibility that he could be wrong. It wasn't like he was presented with evidence and he felt the evidence was poor or insufficient.

YouTube Video channels or persons that "Grind Your Gears" (Internet Talk Post)

kingmob says...

What I don't like...

The painful videos...I always put them off until last when they bubble on the sift.

I don't hate the Young Turks as much as I appreciate their new perspective. That being said I can't watch their videos to finish.

You will hate me for trying to change direction....but what do you LOVE on the YouTube. I have been loving the Vox recently. It gives me the feeling that news and reporting is coming back.

Sorry if I didn't play well...someone invited me.

YouTube Video channels or persons that "Grind Your Gears" (Internet Talk Post)

PlayhousePals says...

NO, a thousand times NO, to the Young Turks

NO to any animal suffering of any kind ... I just can't unsee that no matter how happy the ending!

NO to truth distorters as well as overtly religious anything

NO to racism in any format


***************************************
Unlike Eric I adore the Slo Mo Guys ... would enjoy spending the day with them just once and I delight in the cynical smartass that is Bill Maher

***************************************

YouTube Video channels or persons that "Grind Your Gears" (Internet Talk Post)

transmorpher says...

This is perfect for me, I love complaining ;-)


-OS First Timer channel. (Between the lisp of the presenter, the child like mum and just strange father it has got to be the most cringeworthy videos in history).

-Any video with an intro/logo that goes for more than 2 seconds

-The Young Turks (a perfect example of "the empty can rattles the most")

-Rich Piana, right babe?

-Mean spirited pranks / experiments



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon